What ever the result next week in the Indy Referendum, I am now really worried about just how much long term damage threats like this will have on business investment in Scotland.
I'm a Speyside man essentially, however. I have been since I walked the Speyside Way
If you haven't already, you should try Highland Park's Orkney neighbour Scapa. Amazingly smooth, richly sweet -fantastic with food.
Not tried Scapa but whisky with food can be rather good. I once had dinner with a senior bod who whistled up a bottle of Laphroaig to go with the fish course. It worked surprisingly well, but I have never repeated the experiment.
Big risk! Certainly not one I'd have paired with fish! Chocolate and cheese are the classic match with whisky -there's a cheese called Applewood smoked cheddar (available in most supermarkets) that's amazing with a smoky whisky like Talisker.
Come on Scotland! You're halfway to self destructing - one big heave and you'll be over the line.
Hopefully not. Some of us are really worried.
My wife I have to constantly calm down such is her worry.
Probably a very small snapshot at why woman are more inclined to no.
The worry, in my Wife's case is tough to see as i try tell her either way, as a couple we'll find a way forward.
Oh, and before anyone says it's because of 'scaremongering' from Team No, it is not. She loves our life (we are NOT rich but we do have a our first purchased house and food to eat) and feels Salmond and his cohorts are going to ruin it for her and our, hopefully, imminent children. Woman's response may be emotive but my wife only hears the factual strength of an argument.
This post become emotional than I've ever been in my life! Ha.
Good luck. Though I believe it is Scotland's decision and they have the right to depart if they wish, I also really think Scotland is being sold the most amazing pup ever by the Yes campaign.
Though I am "safe" in Cardiff, it has made me contemplate the "what if" we ever get down this insane road as espoused by Plaid here. Warp speed to the poor house for us it would be. I would have to seriously think about packing my bags it would be so bonkers. Fortunately I genuinely believe we are light years away from that but that doesn't allay your fears. Best wishes.
That's the Tories first lead with Ipsos-Mori since December 2011 and Vetogasm
Tories tired of taking one for the Union saying 'f*ck it'?
Although I'm an unabashed unionist I think the No campaign tactic of suggesting Labour will win the next GE is ludicrous and has back-fired. Ed has gone up there and looks an irrelevance , rather like Man U since Fergie left. Ruth Davidson on the other hand - quite impressive.
I'm a Speyside man essentially, however. I have been since I walked the Speyside Way
If you haven't already, you should try Highland Park's Orkney neighbour Scapa. Amazingly smooth, richly sweet -fantastic with food.
@Luckyguy1983 - I was thinking about Scapa myself when I typed that. I haven't had it for a long time (first was a pouring wet day ashore from a yacht in Kirkwall) as I find HP so good, but perhaps I ought to refresh my acquaintance (and myself) sometime.
@taffys - I find them milder - for me - than Islays which I often find rather peaty (horses for courses, nothing wrong with that sometimes).
I love Highland Park too. Yes, you should def give Scapa another try -such a beautiful malt.
What ever the result next week in the Indy Referendum, I am now really worried about just how much long term damage threats like this will have on business investment in Scotland.
Tell her not to worry you should have 2 years to decide which subject you will be.
Many at work are scottish by birth and lived and worked most of their life in England, I imagine they will have to choose eventually if there is a yes vote.
Cheers.
Funnily, that's what I tell her. We will have time to assess how we make the best of it, in the event Yes wins.
We lack the "Cult of the Leader" and the unquestioning followers. Nor do our politicians employ a panel of "yes men" to applaud and clap The Leader in press conferences whilst he denies reality and ridicules journalists ....
They need just over 51% to win on the day. Given it's this close (arguably within the margin of error) one way they could do it is by well camouflaged turnout tactics like this.
Anyone who doesn't join, cheer or support these marches could feel themselves subject to intimidation.
Heh, the shy No theory may have some marginal traction however far more interesting is that the poor and the young - far more likely to vote Yes - don't have landlines. Add that to the fact that those newly registered are poor and young and you start to see a pattern of likely Yes votes not being picked up by polling methodologies.
It has been interesting reading the take on here which seems pretty much Tory and little England for the most part. Many Scots, including myself, feel that the average Scot will be far better off if we didn't have to subsidise the South and especially London.
Britain is broke and reduced to money printing. Government debt is being sold to banks who are creating money out of thin air and that is what is financing Westminster. That's why the broke banks and the broke government are trying to terrorise Scots - because it's future oil income which is guaranteeing government debt repayments to markets. And that's only where there is a market for Uk debt and no merely currency swaps with the other money printers such as the US in order to pretend that market exists.
We want out before the Titanic sinks and surely taking the oil with us will mean rUK will be on the ropes along with Spain and Italy and Scotland heading in the direction of fabulously wealthy Norway..
The southern myths of their own enduring wealth and the dependency of the native colonies is a fantastic source for jokes but it's sort of sad in a way.
In any case, it's the 65+ keeping the No vote afloat - they won't be around for long..
Uhm, virtually all polls show that the young: 16-24 - are more likely to vote NO.
Also, ICM now uses a mix of landline and mobile numbers.
The rest of your post is interesting psychologically, but less so, economically.
Utter rubbish about English arrogance. The scots get a vote on being independent from the rest of us (we don't) and we get called arrogant. Jesus it shows how the English left really don't like England if that is what you can come up with in your 'analysis'
Why did the Scots get a vote? Because their democratically elected parliament had a mandate for it. Cameron could hardly say no. But the establishment have been arrogant - giving a referendum that you arrogantly assume you will win because the other side's argument is stupid is by definition arrogance.
Yes I'm a leftie. And I'm also a Unionist. The Better Together campaign has been an apocalypse of a campaign offering no passion or vision or hope, just a lecture and threats. You don't win an argument like that, especially when you have completely misjudged both the strength of opinion against you and the appeal of the vision and hope offered by the other side.
Yes, independence is high risk. But when the UK is also high risk and offers little hope or prospects, what the hell is there to lose? You might not agree with that diagnosis of the UK and I certainly don't. But enough peopole voting appear to feel that way, and their disenchantment with the current system has been dismissed as something that can be bought off with threats about having to pay to watch Eastenders.
I think no will win by 55/45 . I have put money on Labrokes under /over 46.5 market. The question that is being voted on is so huge (unlike even a general election) that there may be disparity between what a person will say to a pollster (when it doesn't matter) and what they will do in a vote (when it does matter ). This disparity may not occur or be so great in a general election as not so much rides on it.
How many times do you say you are going to leave your partner or leave your job before you actually do ? more than once I would say
Heh, the shy No theory may have some marginal traction however far more interesting is that the poor and the young - far more likely to vote Yes - don't have landlines. Add that to the fact that those newly registered are poor and young and you start to see a pattern of likely Yes votes not being picked up by polling methodologies.
It has been interesting reading the take on here which seems pretty much Tory and little England for the most part. Many Scots, including myself, feel that the average Scot will be far better off if we didn't have to subsidise the South and especially London.
Britain is broke and reduced to money printing. Government debt is being sold to banks who are creating money out of thin air and that is what is financing Westminster. That's why the broke banks and the broke government are trying to terrorise Scots - because it's future oil income which is guaranteeing government debt repayments to markets. And that's only where there is a market for Uk debt and no merely currency swaps with the other money printers such as the US in order to pretend that market exists.
We want out before the Titanic sinks and surely taking the oil with us will mean rUK will be on the ropes along with Spain and Italy and Scotland heading in the direction of fabulously wealthy Norway..
The southern myths of their own enduring wealth and the dependency of the native colonies is a fantastic source for jokes but it's sort of sad in a way.
In any case, it's the 65+ keeping the No vote afloat - they won't be around for long..
Uhm, virtually all polls show that the young: 16-24 - are more likely to vote NO.
Also, ICM now uses a mix of landline and mobile numbers.
The rest of your post is interesting psychologically, but less so, economically.
You have my every sympathy. We all have our worries and fears and we're with you. Seeing demagoue effwit politicians peddle their shit and ruining people's lives is hard to bear - or forgive. Vote NO. And give the Mrs a cuddle.
We both have postal votes and sent No two votes at least!
That's the Tories first lead with Ipsos-Mori since December 2011 and Vetogasm
Tories tired of taking one for the Union saying 'f*ck it'?
Although I'm an unabashed unionist I think the No campaign tactic of suggesting Labour will win the next GE is ludicrous and has back-fired. Ed has gone up there and looks an irrelevance , rather like Man U since Fergie left. Ruth Davidson on the other hand - quite impressive.
Ruth Davidson is the politicain coming out of this with the best enhancement to her reputation. In an independent Scotland she would absolutely revitalise and independent Conservative party.
Heh, the shy No theory may have some marginal traction however far more interesting is that the poor and the young - far more likely to vote Yes - don't have landlines. Add that to the fact that those newly registered are poor and young and you start to see a pattern of likely Yes votes not being picked up by polling methodologies.
It has been interesting reading the take on here which seems pretty much Tory and little England for the most part. Many Scots, including myself, feel that the average Scot will be far better off if we didn't have to subsidise the South and especially London.
Britain is broke and reduced to money printing. Government debt is being sold to banks who are creating money out of thin air and that is what is financing Westminster. That's why the broke banks and the broke government are trying to terrorise Scots - because it's future oil income which is guaranteeing government debt repayments to markets. And that's only where there is a market for Uk debt and no merely currency swaps with the other money printers such as the US in order to pretend that market exists.
We want out before the Titanic sinks and surely taking the oil with us will mean rUK will be on the ropes along with Spain and Italy and Scotland heading in the direction of fabulously wealthy Norway..
The southern myths of their own enduring wealth and the dependency of the native colonies is a fantastic source for jokes but it's sort of sad in a way.
In any case, it's the 65+ keeping the No vote afloat - they won't be around for long..
I was certain mobiles were also called in this polling research?
“The heads of these companies are rich men, in cahoots with a rich English Tory Prime Minister, to keep Scotland’s poor, poorer through lies and distortions. The power they have now to subvert our democracy will come to an end with a Yes.”
He said BP will have to “learn the meaning of nationalisation” and if it wants access to “monster fields” off Shetland “it will have to learn to bend the knee to a greater power.
Has anybody seen any mysterious fire priestesses in the SNP camp recently?
Dear God..... and he is the Number Two in the SNP?
No. Not at all. It's like a journalist writing an article on the policies of Mrs Thatcher's second term in office based on asking Ted Heath's views on politics. Just like that. Messrs Sillars and Salmond split long ago on major policy issues and Mr Sillars' activity is best seen as just one thread amongst many in the Yes campaign.
Edit: Mr S is the recent widower of the late Margo McDonald, who became an independent MSP after splitting with the SNP (can't remember if before or after she was elected).
Fair enough that he's split with Salmond - didn't know that so thanks - but, genuine question, surely you can see there's a danger of the damage this kind of talk is doing to Scotland? If I'm BP I might be studying the map of Alberta rather than Aberdeen for my next investment now, or if I'm a Dutch (say) widget manufacturer looking for a "British" site for my factory I might now start looking at Middlesborough rather than Musselburgh. It's the mood music, and it really really isn't good to outsiders.
As I say there's a perfectly respectable "independence and to hell with the cost" point of view, but I for one would be really worried if I lived up there.
I'm a Speyside man essentially, however. I have been since I walked the Speyside Way
Many commiserations. The Speyside Way is (*), the worst of all the national trails in EW&S. No wonder you had to drown your sorrows after experiencing ankle-biter stiles every f'ing ten yards on the stretch to the north of Cromdale.
It even makes the scintillating views of the M25 from the North Downs Way seem majestic ...
Come on Scotland! You're halfway to self destructing - one big heave and you'll be over the line.
Hopefully not. Some of us are really worried.
My wife I have to constantly calm down such is her worry.
Probably a very small snapshot at why woman are more inclined to no.
The worry, in my Wife's case is tough to see as i try tell her either way, as a couple we'll find a way forward.
Oh, and before anyone says it's because of 'scaremongering' from Team No, it is not. She loves our life (we are NOT rich but we do have a our first purchased house and food to eat) and feels Salmond and his cohorts are going to ruin it for her and our, hopefully, imminent children. Woman's response may be emotive but my wife only hears the factual strength of an argument.
This post become emotional than I've ever been in my life! Ha.
Good luck. Though I believe it is Scotland's decision and they have the right to depart if they wish, I also really think Scotland is being sold the most amazing pup ever by the Yes campaign.
Though I am "safe" in Cardiff, it has made me contemplate the "what if" we ever get down this insane road as espoused by Plaid here. Warp speed to the poor house for us it would be. I would have to seriously think about packing my bags it would be so bonkers. Fortunately I genuinely believe we are light years away from that but that doesn't allay your fears. Best wishes.
I don't want to be rude about Wales, or the Welsh, but there is no way you could ever make a functioning individual country without a lot of hardship.
Heh, the shy No theory may have some marginal traction however far more interesting is that the poor and the young - far more likely to vote Yes - don't have landlines. Add that to the fact that those newly registered are poor and young and you start to see a pattern of likely Yes votes not being picked up by polling methodologies.
It has been interesting reading the take on here which seems pretty much Tory and little England for the most part. Many Scots, including myself, feel that the average Scot will be far better off if we didn't have to subsidise the South and especially London.
Britain is broke and reduced to money printing. Government debt is being sold to banks who are creating money out of thin air and that is what is financing Westminster. That's why the broke banks and the broke government are trying to terrorise Scots - because it's future oil income which is guaranteeing government debt repayments to markets. And that's only where there is a market for Uk debt and no merely currency swaps with the other money printers such as the US in order to pretend that market exists.
We want out before the Titanic sinks and surely taking the oil with us will mean rUK will be on the ropes along with Spain and Italy and Scotland heading in the direction of fabulously wealthy Norway..
The southern myths of their own enduring wealth and the dependency of the native colonies is a fantastic source for jokes but it's sort of sad in a way.
In any case, it's the 65+ keeping the No vote afloat - they won't be around for long..
Just an FYI, oil tax revenue was just £4bn in the previous financial year. If you believe that this small level of income underpins £120bn worth of Gilts that were written last year then I think the mental asylum is missing a patient.
The income from oil for the government includes corporation tax and there is also the small matter of the jobs it underwrites. However, the income from oil is set to grow as prices expand and lets face it, the UK is only paying it's interest off (the debt rises exponentially..) - without the oil borrowing will increase and rUK's ratings will nosedive.
However what happens to those corporate profits after tax? They go into the banking system and cover the capital ratios of the banks allowing for huge volumes of leverage and ergo financial speculation. It also allows for the purchase of guilts.
Interesting that feelings about the UK account for only 6% of YES support, but 53% of NO support.
It seems to suggest that YES may win on the back of sheer anger and disillusionment about Westminster, rather than any deep seated loathing of the Union itself.
If that is true, and the vote is carried, it will be an absolute tragedy.
I'm a Speyside man essentially, however. I have been since I walked the Speyside Way
If you haven't already, you should try Highland Park's Orkney neighbour Scapa. Amazingly smooth, richly sweet -fantastic with food.
@Luckyguy1983 - I was thinking about Scapa myself when I typed that. I haven't had it for a long time (first was a pouring wet day ashore from a yacht in Kirkwall) as I find HP so good, but perhaps I ought to refresh my acquaintance (and myself) sometime.
@taffys - I find them milder - for me - than Islays which I often find rather peaty (horses for courses, nothing wrong with that sometimes).
We want out before the Titanic sinks and surely taking the oil with us will mean rUK will be on the ropes along with Spain and Italy and Scotland heading in the direction of fabulously wealthy Norway.....
I never knew the Scots were such a selfish people ;-). What about the 750k of your compatriots living and working in England? Is this your method of persuading them home?
Heh, the shy No theory may have some marginal traction however far more interesting is that the poor and the young - far more likely to vote Yes - don't have landlines. Add that to the fact that those newly registered are poor and young and you start to see a pattern of likely Yes votes not being picked up by polling methodologies.
It has been interesting reading the take on here which seems pretty much Tory and little England for the most part. Many Scots, including myself, feel that the average Scot will be far better off if we didn't have to subsidise the South and especially London.
Britain is broke and reduced to money printing. Government debt is being sold to banks who are creating money out of thin air and that is what is financing Westminster. That's why the broke banks and the broke government are trying to terrorise Scots - because it's future oil income which is guaranteeing government debt repayments to markets. And that's only where there is a market for Uk debt and no merely currency swaps with the other money printers such as the US in order to pretend that market exists.
We want out before the Titanic sinks and surely taking the oil with us will mean rUK will be on the ropes along with Spain and Italy and Scotland heading in the direction of fabulously wealthy Norway..
The southern myths of their own enduring wealth and the dependency of the native colonies is a fantastic source for jokes but it's sort of sad in a way.
In any case, it's the 65+ keeping the No vote afloat - they won't be around for long..
Riiight.
Typically the young and the poor are the least likely to vote but I;m sure your passionate argument that a Currency Union with a semi-bankrupt state will motivate them.
Heh, the shy No theory may have some marginal traction however far more interesting is that the poor and the young - far more likely to vote Yes - don't have landlines. Add that to the fact that those newly registered are poor and young and you start to see a pattern of likely Yes votes not being picked up by polling methodologies.
It has been interesting reading the take on here which seems pretty much Tory and little England for the most part. Many Scots, including myself, feel that the average Scot will be far better off if we didn't have to subsidise the South and especially London.
Britain is broke and reduced to money printing. Government debt is being sold to banks who are creating money out of thin air and that is what is financing Westminster. That's why the broke banks and the broke government are trying to terrorise Scots - because it's future oil income which is guaranteeing government debt repayments to markets. And that's only where there is a market for Uk debt and no merely currency swaps with the other money printers such as the US in order to pretend that market exists.
We want out before the Titanic sinks and surely taking the oil with us will mean rUK will be on the ropes along with Spain and Italy and Scotland heading in the direction of fabulously wealthy Norway..
The southern myths of their own enduring wealth and the dependency of the native colonies is a fantastic source for jokes but it's sort of sad in a way.
In any case, it's the 65+ keeping the No vote afloat - they won't be around for long..
Uhm, virtually all polls show that the young: 16-24 - are more likely to vote NO.
Also, ICM now uses a mix of landline and mobile numbers.
The rest of your post is interesting psychologically, but less so, economically.
Not in this poll, they polled just landlines.
OK, my bad. You usually know what you are talking about. Yet there was a Scots guy on Twitter saying he was polled on his mobile, for this very poll.
Indeed. I've read numerous saying they were called by mobile which is why I assumed as such.
And don't forget MaxPB, that without the North Sea oil and Gas rUK's imports will increase dramatically causing a huge outflow of sterling.
This is just one reason I personally do not want a currency union with rUK post-independence as sterling is a flawed currency and in terms of risk means Scots could be endangered by rUK's lack of real productive assets to back up its currency. Furthermore the thought of leveraged buy-outs of lucrative and cheaply priced Scottish businesses and real estate by London speculators does give me the shivers.
That's the Tories first lead with Ipsos-Mori since December 2011 and Vetogasm
Tories tired of taking one for the Union saying 'f*ck it'?
Although I'm an unabashed unionist I think the No campaign tactic of suggesting Labour will win the next GE is ludicrous and has back-fired. Ed has gone up there and looks an irrelevance , rather like Man U since Fergie left. Ruth Davidson on the other hand - quite impressive.
Ruth Davidson is the politicain coming out of this with the best enhancement to her reputation. In an independent Scotland she would absolutely revitalise and independent Conservative party.
Irregardless of Referendum standpoint, I concur. Best I've ever seen her.
I was really unimpressed for a long time by her Leadership. Not so much anymore.
I'm a Speyside man essentially, however. I have been since I walked the Speyside Way
If you haven't already, you should try Highland Park's Orkney neighbour Scapa. Amazingly smooth, richly sweet -fantastic with food.
@Luckyguy1983 - I was thinking about Scapa myself when I typed that. I haven't had it for a long time (first was a pouring wet day ashore from a yacht in Kirkwall) as I find HP so good, but perhaps I ought to refresh my acquaintance (and myself) sometime.
@taffys - I find them milder - for me - than Islays which I often find rather peaty (horses for courses, nothing wrong with that sometimes).
I don't like Jura. I have a half bottle in my cupboard (I think it's 'Supersition'), and its not my favourite at all.
I visited the Isle of Arran distillery and got a bottle of their 10 yr old, and another finished in Amarone. That's almost pink...
Utter rubbish about English arrogance. The scots get a vote on being independent from the rest of us (we don't) and we get called arrogant. Jesus it shows how the English left really don't like England if that is what you can come up with in your 'analysis'
Why did the Scots get a vote? Because their democratically elected parliament had a mandate for it. Cameron could hardly say no. But the establishment have been arrogant - giving a referendum that you arrogantly assume you will win because the other side's argument is stupid is by definition arrogance.
Yes I'm a leftie. And I'm also a Unionist. The Better Together campaign has been an apocalypse of a campaign offering no passion or vision or hope, just a lecture and threats. You don't win an argument like that, especially when you have completely misjudged both the strength of opinion against you and the appeal of the vision and hope offered by the other side.
Yes, independence is high risk. But when the UK is also high risk and offers little hope or prospects, what the hell is there to lose? You might not agree with that diagnosis of the UK and I certainly don't. But enough peopole voting appear to feel that way, and their disenchantment with the current system has been dismissed as something that can be bought off with threats about having to pay to watch Eastenders.
A campaign for Better Together is going to be a bit 'negative' as you call it because it is about preserving the status quo. Sometimes that is important to state though and to state what would be lost . That is not threats as the SNP emotively and ridiculously state its doing the vote a service
Interesting that feelings about the UK account for only 6% of YES support, but 53% of NO support.
It seems to suggest that YES may win on the back of sheer anger and disillusionment about Westminster, rather than any deep seated loathing of the Union itself.
If that is true, and the vote is carried, it will be an absolute tragedy.
Dear God..... and he is the Number Two in the SNP?
No. Not at all. It's like a journalist writing an article on the policies of Mrs Thatcher's second term in office based on asking Ted Heath's views on politics. Just like that. Messrs Sillars and Salmond split long ago on major policy issues and Mr Sillars' activity is best seen as just one thread amongst many in the Yes campaign.
Edit: Mr S is the recent widower of the late Margo McDonald, who became an independent MSP after splitting with the SNP (can't remember if before or after she was elected).
Fair enough that he's split with Salmond - didn't know that so thanks - but, genuine question, surely you can see there's a danger of the damage this kind of talk is doing to Scotland? If I'm BP I might be studying the map of Alberta rather than Aberdeen for my next investment now, or if I'm a Dutch (say) widget manufacturer looking for a "British" site for my factory I might now start looking at Middlesborough rather than Musselburgh. It's the mood music, and it really really isn't good to outsiders.
As I say there's a perfectly respectable "independence and to hell with the cost" point of view, but I for one would be really worried if I lived up there.
Sillars split with Salmond?
Here he is campaigning with Salmond - shoulder to shoulder - two days ago.
And don't forget MaxPB, that without the North Sea oil and Gas rUK's imports will increase dramatically causing a huge outflow of sterling.
This is just one reason I personally do not want a currency union with rUK post-independence as sterling is a flawed currency and in terms of risk means Scots could be endangered by rUK's lack of real productive assets to back up its currency. Furthermore the thought of leveraged buy-outs of lucrative and cheaply priced Scottish businesses and real estate by London speculators does give me the shivers.
Well, we've had loads of this rubbish from anti independence voters over the years so at least it's a change to hear this kind of rubbish from a pro independence voter.
Well, we've had loads of this rubbish from anti independence voters over the years so at least it's a change to hear this kind of rubbish from a pro independence voter.
I love the way the same poll is open to such different interpretations / spin, depending on the angle you come at things from...for example:
ft.com: Second Scots poll gives No campaign lead ICM survey backs claims that Yes surge has been halted
elswhere: "Neck and neck" "still too close to call" "everything to play for" etc etc...
Neck and neck et al will surely sell more papers
Thing is, both interpretations are valid.
It is neck and neck: scrotum-tighteningly close.
Yet I can't help feeling (perhaps optimistically) that at the height of the Salmond Leap, last weekend, when YES seemed to be sweeping to victory, this same ICM poll might have shown YES ahead.
Now we've just got to sit it out and wait for the next nerve wracker. I understand we have 36 hours to actually do some work, isn't that right? Opinium/Observer is the next poll: tomorrow night.
I'm sure TSE will confirm this, if so.
And now I am actually going to do some of that work.
The opinium observer poll is just a Westminster VI only poll.
The next confirmed Indyref polls
YouGov for the Times/Sun - Wednesday night
Ipsos-Mori phone poll - Wednesday (probably the night)
I'm a Speyside man essentially, however. I have been since I walked the Speyside Way
If you haven't already, you should try Highland Park's Orkney neighbour Scapa. Amazingly smooth, richly sweet -fantastic with food.
Not tried Scapa but whisky with food can be rather good. I once had dinner with a senior bod who whistled up a bottle of Laphroaig to go with the fish course. It worked surprisingly well, but I have never repeated the experiment.
Big risk! Certainly not one I'd have paired with fish! Chocolate and cheese are the classic match with whisky -there's a cheese called Applewood smoked cheddar (available in most supermarkets) that's amazing with a smoky whisky like Talisker.
But try Scapa -you'll thank me.
I shall get the nice lady at the local booze shop to order me a bottle.
The classic combination of whisky with food is I reckon is fruitcake (Dundee cake for preference, but most will do) and with a creamy, crumbly but strongish cheese (Wensleydale is superb) all washed down with a single malt whisky of your choice (I am an Islay man for preference, but not dogmatic on the issue). The mix of textures and flavours makes the combination fit for the Gods.
Heh, the shy No theory may have some marginal traction however far more interesting is that the poor and the young - far more likely to vote Yes - don't have landlines. Add that to the fact that those newly registered are poor and young and you start to see a pattern of likely Yes votes not being picked up by polling methodologies.
It has been interesting reading the take on here which seems pretty much Tory and little England for the most part. Many Scots, including myself, feel that the average Scot will be far better off if we didn't have to subsidise the South and especially London.
Britain is broke and reduced to money printing. Government debt is being sold to banks who are creating money out of thin air and that is what is financing Westminster. That's why the broke banks and the broke government are trying to terrorise Scots - because it's future oil income which is guaranteeing government debt repayments to markets. And that's only where there is a market for Uk debt and no merely currency swaps with the other money printers such as the US in order to pretend that market exists.
We want out before the Titanic sinks and surely taking the oil with us will mean rUK will be on the ropes along with Spain and Italy and Scotland heading in the direction of fabulously wealthy Norway..
The southern myths of their own enduring wealth and the dependency of the native colonies is a fantastic source for jokes but it's sort of sad in a way.
In any case, it's the 65+ keeping the No vote afloat - they won't be around for long..
Just an FYI, oil tax revenue was just £4bn in the previous financial year. If you believe that this small level of income underpins £120bn worth of Gilts that were written last year then I think the mental asylum is missing a patient.
The income from oil for the government includes corporation tax and there is also the small matter of the jobs it underwrites. However, the income from oil is set to grow as prices expand and lets face it, the UK is only paying it's interest off (the debt rises exponentially..) - without the oil borrowing will increase and rUK's ratings will nosedive.
However what happens to those corporate profits after tax? They go into the banking system and cover the capital ratios of the banks allowing for huge volumes of leverage and ergo financial speculation. It also allows for the purchase of guilts.
Come on Scotland! You're halfway to self destructing - one big heave and you'll be over the line.
Hopefully not. Some of us are really worried.
My wife I have to constantly calm down such is her worry.
Probably a very small snapshot at why woman are more inclined to no.
The worry, in my Wife's case is tough to see as i try tell her either way, as a couple we'll find a way forward.
Oh, and before anyone says it's because of 'scaremongering' from Team No, it is not. She loves our life (we are NOT rich but we do have a our first purchased house and food to eat) and feels Salmond and his cohorts are going to ruin it for her and our, hopefully, imminent children. Woman's response may be emotive but my wife only hears the factual strength of an argument.
This post become emotional than I've ever been in my life! Ha.
Good luck. Though I believe it is Scotland's decision and they have the right to depart if they wish, I also really think Scotland is being sold the most amazing pup ever by the Yes campaign.
Though I am "safe" in Cardiff, it has made me contemplate the "what if" we ever get down this insane road as espoused by Plaid here. Warp speed to the poor house for us it would be. I would have to seriously think about packing my bags it would be so bonkers. Fortunately I genuinely believe we are light years away from that but that doesn't allay your fears. Best wishes.
I don't want to be rude about Wales, or the Welsh, but there is no way you could ever make a functioning individual country without a lot of hardship.
My point precisely. No offence remotely taken. I can add up, unlike way too many people in Scotland I fear. Of course they can create a country, and govern it well no doubt, but a hell of a lot of eggs will be needed for quite a small omelette, and it's the egg breaking that the SNP et al are saying doesn't need doing. It's rubbish.
If you're ever feeling very rich or fancy an enormous blowout - I can't recommend Petrus too highly. It was the infamous eatery where a bunch of bankers spent £44k on wine with their meal - then got sacked for it. What a way to get your P45! news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1839963.stm
They've got the most stunning range of all things spirits. A supplier took me there back in 2003 and we drank what felt like a gallon of vintage stock. Stuff 100+yrs old and it was super fun. The bill wasn't my concern so that made it even better. I think it was over a grand for the two of us inc lunch!
I'm a Speyside man essentially, however. I have been since I walked the Speyside Way
If you haven't already, you should try Highland Park's Orkney neighbour Scapa. Amazingly smooth, richly sweet -fantastic with food.
Not tried Scapa but whisky with food can be rather good. I once had dinner with a senior bod who whistled up a bottle of Laphroaig to go with the fish course. It worked surprisingly well, but I have never repeated the experiment.
I love the way the same poll is open to such different interpretations / spin, depending on the angle you come at things from...for example:
ft.com: Second Scots poll gives No campaign lead ICM survey backs claims that Yes surge has been halted
elswhere: "Neck and neck" "still too close to call" "everything to play for" etc etc...
Neck and neck et al will surely sell more papers
Thing is, both interpretations are valid.
It is neck and neck: scrotum-tighteningly close.
Yet I can't help feeling (perhaps optimistically) that at the height of the Salmond Leap, last weekend, when YES seemed to be sweeping to victory, this same ICM poll might have shown YES ahead.
Now we've just got to sit it out and wait for the next nerve wracker. I understand we have 36 hours to actually do some work, isn't that right? Opinium/Observer is the next poll: tomorrow night.
I'm sure TSE will confirm this, if so.
And now I am actually going to do some of that work.
They are indeed.
I think though, from a frank position, the papers must love such events as this. Don't blame them of course!
These polls, tweets are ruining my nerves. My usual cool exterior close to cracking!
If that's the case now, next Thursday overnight will be truly horrendous for what's left of my nerves!
I've already warned my Wife to expect me to still be up when she awakes for work. I've taken a long weekend just for the referendum.
And don't forget MaxPB, that without the North Sea oil and Gas rUK's imports will increase dramatically causing a huge outflow of sterling.
This is just one reason I personally do not want a currency union with rUK post-independence as sterling is a flawed currency and in terms of risk means Scots could be endangered by rUK's lack of real productive assets to back up its currency. Furthermore the thought of leveraged buy-outs of lucrative and cheaply priced Scottish businesses and real estate by London speculators does give me the shivers.
ROFL
so when the price of oil has drop 15% in the last 3 months you think that's good news ? It.s excellent news for rUK as a net importer but may give IScotland a few issues.
Utter rubbish about English arrogance. The scots get a vote on being independent from the rest of us (we don't) and we get called arrogant. Jesus it shows how the English left really don't like England if that is what you can come up with in your 'analysis'
Why did the Scots get a vote? Because their democratically elected parliament had a mandate for it. Cameron could hardly say no. But the establishment have been arrogant - giving a referendum that you arrogantly assume you will win because the other side's argument is stupid is by definition arrogance.
Yes I'm a leftie. And I'm also a Unionist. The Better Together campaign has been an apocalypse of a campaign offering no passion or vision or hope, just a lecture and threats. You don't win an argument like that, especially when you have completely misjudged both the strength of opinion against you and the appeal of the vision and hope offered by the other side.
Yes, independence is high risk. But when the UK is also high risk and offers little hope or prospects, what the hell is there to lose? You might not agree with that diagnosis of the UK and I certainly don't. But enough peopole voting appear to feel that way, and their disenchantment with the current system has been dismissed as something that can be bought off with threats about having to pay to watch Eastenders.
A campaign for Better Together is going to be a bit 'negative' as you call it because it is about preserving the status quo. Sometimes that is important to state though and to state what would be lost . That is not threats as the SNP emotively and ridiculously state its doing the vote a service
The no campaign has been hobbled from the start by the terms under which the referendum is put - they offer the status quo, the world you know. Yes, on the other hand, offers the world of your dreams - independence will solve the NHS, taxation, equality etc etc. Cameron is responsible for allowing this unbalanced contest - he agreed the ground rules, and they are strongly favourable to yes.
I think the vote will be Yes. The odds, as many have said below, are inconsistent with the polling. All the value is with yes, still at 4.5 on Betfair.
The SNP have created a new reality. They have said again and again (i) how rich and successful Scotland is (i.e. we can go alone) and (ii) look at all these benefits you will get when we are independent (i.e. we should go alone). Saying it often and consistently enough has made enough people believe it...
...it is nonsense, of course, none of their sums add up and many of their arguments are ludicrous (my favourite, little remarked upon, is their estimate of just 200m to setup a whole new state! In the real world, 200m will, perhaps, pay for a moderately large IT system).
The UK's breakup will be long and painful. There will be enormous shock & anger in England / the rUK at the outcome.
Utter rubbish about English arrogance. The scots get a vote on being independent from the rest of us (we don't) and we get called arrogant. Jesus it shows how the English left really don't like England if that is what you can come up with in your 'analysis'
Why did the Scots get a vote? Because their democratically elected parliament had a mandate for it. Cameron could hardly say no. But the establishment have been arrogant - giving a referendum that you arrogantly assume you will win because the other side's argument is stupid is by definition arrogance.
Yes I'm a leftie. And I'm also a Unionist. The Better Together campaign has been an apocalypse of a campaign offering no passion or vision or hope, just a lecture and threats. You don't win an argument like that, especially when you have completely misjudged both the strength of opinion against you and the appeal of the vision and hope offered by the other side.
Yes, independence is high risk. But when the UK is also high risk and offers little hope or prospects, what the hell is there to lose? You might not agree with that diagnosis of the UK and I certainly don't. But enough peopole voting appear to feel that way, and their disenchantment with the current system has been dismissed as something that can be bought off with threats about having to pay to watch Eastenders.
A campaign for Better Together is going to be a bit 'negative' as you call it because it is about preserving the status quo. Sometimes that is important to state though and to state what would be lost . That is not threats as the SNP emotively and ridiculously state its doing the vote a service
The no campaign has been hobbled from the start by the terms under which the referendum is put - they offer the status quo, the world you know. Yes, on the other hand, offers the world of your dreams - independence will solve the NHS, taxation, equality etc etc. Cameron is responsible for allowing this unbalanced contest - he agreed the ground rules, and they are strongly favourable to yes.
cannot quite see what other option he had ? The Scots can vote to stay in or out but to offer anything else would require the consent of all the UK
Weather forecast for Scotland next Thursday currently looking good according to the GFS (Global Forecasting System). Dry with mild temperatures. This can change of course!
Utter rubbish about English arrogance. The scots get a vote on being independent from the rest of us (we don't) and we get called arrogant. Jesus it shows how the English left really don't like England if that is what you can come up with in your 'analysis'
Why did the Scots get a vote? Because their democratically elected parliament had a mandate for it. Cameron could hardly say no. But the establishment have been arrogant - giving a referendum that you arrogantly assume you will win because the other side's argument is stupid is by definition arrogance.
Yes I'm a leftie. And I'm also a Unionist. The Better Together campaign has been an apocalypse of a campaign offering no passion or vision or hope, just a lecture and threats. You don't win an argument like that, especially when you have completely misjudged both the strength of opinion against you and the appeal of the vision and hope offered by the other side.
Yes, independence is high risk. But when the UK is also high risk and offers little hope or prospects, what the hell is there to lose? You might not agree with that diagnosis of the UK and I certainly don't. But enough peopole voting appear to feel that way, and their disenchantment with the current system has been dismissed as something that can be bought off with threats about having to pay to watch Eastenders.
A campaign for Better Together is going to be a bit 'negative' as you call it because it is about preserving the status quo. Sometimes that is important to state though and to state what would be lost . That is not threats as the SNP emotively and ridiculously state its doing the vote a service
The no campaign has been hobbled from the start by the terms under which the referendum is put - they offer the status quo, the world you know. Yes, on the other hand, offers the world of your dreams - independence will solve the NHS, taxation, equality etc etc. Cameron is responsible for allowing this unbalanced contest - he agreed the ground rules, and they are strongly favourable to yes.
cannot quite see what other option he had ? The Scots can vote to stay in or out but to offer anything else would require the consent of all the UK
As for the SNP they should only make promises they genuinely believe they can match otherwise they are lying to voters in the most important vote in Scottish history. To not have a coherent plan for a currency after a yes vote is doing the vote a disservice .
I love the way the same poll is open to such different interpretations / spin, depending on the angle you come at things from...for example:
ft.com: Second Scots poll gives No campaign lead ICM survey backs claims that Yes surge has been halted
elswhere: "Neck and neck" "still too close to call" "everything to play for" etc etc...
Neck and neck et al will surely sell more papers
Thing is, both interpretations are valid.
It is neck and neck: scrotum-tighteningly close.
Yet I can't help feeling (perhaps optimistically) that at the height of the Salmond Leap, last weekend, when YES seemed to be sweeping to victory, this same ICM poll might have shown YES ahead.
Now we've just got to sit it out and wait for the next nerve wracker. I understand we have 36 hours to actually do some work, isn't that right? Opinium/Observer is the next poll: tomorrow night.
I'm sure TSE will confirm this, if so.
And now I am actually going to do some of that work.
The opinium observer poll is just a Westminster VI only poll.
The next confirmed Indyref polls
YouGov for the Times/Sun - Wednesday night
Ipsos-Mori phone poll - Wednesday (probably the night)
Pretty sure you're wrong. Tomorrow's Opinium is an indyref poll:
@JamesEnders 16h Two #indyref yes/no polls coming from #Opinium with our media partners. 1st this Sat 13th and 2nd on Wed 17th. #ScotlandDecides
Perhaps the question should be not what the next polls will say - less than a week to go until we know anyway. I am open to suggestions about what the respective campaigns should be saying.
I'm of the view that going negative could be effective if done properly and utterly self-destructive if done badly. Better Together have managed the latter, but appear to be ramping up the fear again (will we have adverts listing all the businesses who have said they will leave/hike prices on Sunday?).
At the same time, UK party leaders campaigning separately to show they're Better Together, and a Devo Max on a Fag Packet proposal that most MPs haven't even seen as the reason to vote no isn't the way. We need a big pro-union rally with all of them actually together. They all agree on the Union, set party politics aside for a week and appeal to all we have done together and all we could still do. I do fear that the more we shout fear and abuse at them, the more the wavers will waver into Yes. Just to prove the point to us.
Dear God..... and he is the Number Two in the SNP?
No. Not at all. It's like a journalist writing an article on the policies of Mrs Thatcher's second term in office based on asking Ted Heath's views on politics. Just like that. Messrs Sillars and Salmond split long ago on major policy issues and Mr Sillars' activity is best seen as just one thread amongst many in the Yes campaign.
Edit: Mr S is the recent widower of the late Margo McDonald, who became an independent MSP after splitting with the SNP (can't remember if before or after she was elected).
Fair enough that he's split with Salmond - didn't know that so thanks - but, genuine question, surely you can see there's a danger of the damage this kind of talk is doing to Scotland? If I'm BP I might be studying the map of Alberta rather than Aberdeen for my next investment now, or if I'm a Dutch (say) widget manufacturer looking for a "British" site for my factory I might now start looking at Middlesborough rather than Musselburgh. It's the mood music, and it really really isn't good to outsiders.
As I say there's a perfectly respectable "independence and to hell with the cost" point of view, but I for one would be really worried if I lived up there.
Sillars split with Salmond?
Here he is campaigning with Salmond - shoulder to shoulder - two days ago.
'ALEX SALMOND and Jim Sillars yesterday insisted they had set their differences aside'
They'll never be best pals, and Sillars isn't an MSP or holds any official position in Yes (PB Unionists were recently quoting approvingly his anti CU views as signs of 'splits'). All broad coalitions are uncomfortable to a greater or lesser degree, but Yes makes it work towards one end, while BT have one eye on Westminster & England at the same time pretending their less savoury co Unionists don't exist.
Problem with that is like saying which teams were top of the Prem League last season for most days.... Man City were hardly at all but took it with a late dip on the line...
Perhaps the question should be not what the next polls will say - less than a week to go until we know anyway. I am open to suggestions about what the respective campaigns should be saying.
I'm of the view that going negative could be effective if done properly and utterly self-destructive if done badly. Better Together have managed the latter, but appear to be ramping up the fear again (will we have adverts listing all the businesses who have said they will leave/hike prices on Sunday?).
At the same time, UK party leaders campaigning separately to show they're Better Together, and a Devo Max on a Fag Packet proposal that most MPs haven't even seen as the reason to vote no isn't the way. We need a big pro-union rally with all of them actually together. They all agree on the Union, set party politics aside for a week and appeal to all we have done together and all we could still do. I do fear that the more we shout fear and abuse at them, the more the wavers will waver into Yes. Just to prove the point to us.
RP, as I pointed out in an earlier post what the UK has achieved in the past includes a lot of bloody conquest. It is your side that tries to pretend this never happened and it is your side that seems embarrassed by it all. Rather than embrace the history of the union, it has sought to downplay it whid I believe is a key failing in the No campaign.
Problem with that is like saying which teams were top of the Prem League last season for most days.... Man City were hardly at all but took it with a late dip on the line...
Piss off. You're an absolute [moderated] for mentioning that
Problem with that is like saying which teams were top of the Prem League last season for most days.... Man City were hardly at all but took it with a late dip on the line...
Piss off. You're an absolute [moderated] for mentioning that
Me Eagles if it's any consolation my brother is also a Liverpool fan and I laugh at him a lot too.
I think the vote will be Yes. The odds, as many have said below, are inconsistent with the polling. All the value is with yes, still at 4.5 on Betfair.
The SNP have created a new reality. They have said again and again (i) how rich and successful Scotland is (i.e. we can go alone) and (ii) look at all these benefits you will get when we are independent (i.e. we should go alone). Saying it often and consistently enough has made enough people believe it...
...it is nonsense, of course, none of their sums add up and many of their arguments are ludicrous (my favourite, little remarked upon, is their estimate of just 200m to setup a whole new state! In the real world, 200m will, perhaps, pay for a moderately large IT system).
The UK's breakup will be long and painful. There will be enormous shock & anger in England / the rUK at the outcome.
It will cost Scotland £billions to rebuild the apparatus of state, as they could well discover in the next few years.
It will be up to their politicians to explain why that money is being diverted from health and welfare.
Perhaps the question should be not what the next polls will say - less than a week to go until we know anyway. I am open to suggestions about what the respective campaigns should be saying.
I'm of the view that going negative could be effective if done properly and utterly self-destructive if done badly. Better Together have managed the latter, but appear to be ramping up the fear again (will we have adverts listing all the businesses who have said they will leave/hike prices on Sunday?).
At the same time, UK party leaders campaigning separately to show they're Better Together, and a Devo Max on a Fag Packet proposal that most MPs haven't even seen as the reason to vote no isn't the way. We need a big pro-union rally with all of them actually together. They all agree on the Union, set party politics aside for a week and appeal to all we have done together and all we could still do. I do fear that the more we shout fear and abuse at them, the more the wavers will waver into Yes. Just to prove the point to us.
Who exactly is shouting fear and abuse at Yes supporters? Its a very important vote more important than solving it by bloody marching pretending we all love each other (we don't really) but what needs to be pointed out is hard facts even if they are not all sunshine and flowers. ie currency , business issues ,immigration etc
I would prefer the Scots to decide the vote based on what they know the rest of the UK is thinking (and it isn't we love you please dont' go like a scene in Gone with the Wind )
I think I watched Lawrence of Arabia too much as a kid, but I still associate Saudis with superb manners and dignity. Sure they've got some very peculiar views on women and retribution - and financing all sorts of dubious things, but I don't worry about them as individuals.
Funny how views can stick. I developed a serious dislike of most Arabs [North African mostly] back in the 80s when I had a load of mouthy hot-heads working for me. They were nothing but a pain in the arse.
Problem with that is like saying which teams were top of the Prem League last season for most days.... Man City were hardly at all but took it with a late dip on the line...
Piss off. You're an absolute [moderated] for mentioning that
Rodgers = The Badger?
Only mention it cos Spurs will feature in the 2014/15 version of that table which is a bloody mirabcle... we peaked too soon, like ....?
Anyone know if this Yank firm bidding for Spurs Raiders Inc, is from San Antonio as that would bring some obvious synergies to the table?
Perhaps the question should be not what the next polls will say - less than a week to go until we know anyway. I am open to suggestions about what the respective campaigns should be saying.
I'm of the view that going negative could be effective if done properly and utterly self-destructive if done badly. Better Together have managed the latter, but appear to be ramping up the fear again (will we have adverts listing all the businesses who have said they will leave/hike prices on Sunday?).
At the same time, UK party leaders campaigning separately to show they're Better Together, and a Devo Max on a Fag Packet proposal that most MPs haven't even seen as the reason to vote no isn't the way. We need a big pro-union rally with all of them actually together. They all agree on the Union, set party politics aside for a week and appeal to all we have done together and all we could still do. I do fear that the more we shout fear and abuse at them, the more the wavers will waver into Yes. Just to prove the point to us.
RP, as I pointed out in an earlier post what the UK has achieved in the past includes a lot of bloody conquest. It is your side that tries to pretend this never happened and it is your side that seems embarrassed by it all. Rather than embrace the history of the union, it has sought to downplay it whid I believe is a key failing in the No campaign.
No should have focused more on imperial British triumphs of the past? Hmmm. Not sure that would have worked.
Westminster gave the No side nothing to work with. That is the problem. The Devo-max promise should have been on the table months ago. With this and the warnings about the risks of separation we would not be six days away from the break-up of the country. It dod not need to be an option on the ballot paper, but it should have been there from the start as a reason to vote No.
Problem with that is like saying which teams were top of the Prem League last season for most days.... Man City were hardly at all but took it with a late dip on the line...
Piss off. You're an absolute [moderated] for mentioning that
Rodgers = The Badger?
Only mention it cos Spurs will feature in the 2014/15 version of that table which is a bloody mirabcle... we peaked too soon, like ....?
Anyone know if this Yank firm bidding for Spurs Raiders Inc, is from San Antonio as that would bring some obvious synergies to the table?
Looking at the report the prime mover behind the move is a London born and based guy, and I'm going to engage in lazy stereotyping, judging by his surname a Spurs fan.
Utter rubbish about English arrogance. The scots get a vote on being independent from the rest of us (we don't) and we get called arrogant. Jesus it shows how the English left really don't like England if that is what you can come up with in your 'analysis'
Why did the Scots get a vote? Because their democratically elected parliament had a mandate for it. Cameron could hardly say no. But the establishment have been arrogant - giving a referendum that you arrogantly assume you will win because the other side's argument is stupid is by definition arrogance.
Yes I'm a leftie. And I'm also a Unionist. The Better Together campaign has been an apocalypse of a campaign offering no passion or vision or hope, just a lecture and threats. You don't win an argument like that, especially when you have completely misjudged both the strength of opinion against you and the appeal of the vision and hope offered by the other side.
Yes, independence is high risk. But when the UK is also high risk and offers little hope or prospects, what the hell is there to lose? You might not agree with that diagnosis of the UK and I certainly don't. But enough peopole voting appear to feel that way, and their disenchantment with the current system has been dismissed as something that can be bought off with threats about having to pay to watch Eastenders.
A campaign for Better Together is going to be a bit 'negative' as you call it because it is about preserving the status quo. Sometimes that is important to state though and to state what would be lost . That is not threats as the SNP emotively and ridiculously state its doing the vote a service
The no campaign has been hobbled from the start by the terms under which the referendum is put - they offer the status quo, the world you know. Yes, on the other hand, offers the world of your dreams - independence will solve the NHS, taxation, equality etc etc. Cameron is responsible for allowing this unbalanced contest - he agreed the ground rules, and they are strongly favourable to yes.
cannot quite see what other option he had ? The Scots can vote to stay in or out but to offer anything else would require the consent of all the UK
He could have offered devomax as an option. He could have asked the question in reverse (ie do you want to stay in the UK). He could have insisted on a qualified majority. He could have run a more vigorous pro-UK campaign in in England. He could have granted votes to Scots who live outside Scotland. But he wasn't paying attention - he did not believe that the vote would be close.
Problem with that is like saying which teams were top of the Prem League last season for most days.... Man City were hardly at all but took it with a late dip on the line...
Piss off. You're an absolute [moderated] for mentioning that
Rodgers = The Badger?
Only mention it cos Spurs will feature in the 2014/15 version of that table which is a bloody mirabcle... we peaked too soon, like ....?
Anyone know if this Yank firm bidding for Spurs Raiders Inc, is from San Antonio as that would bring some obvious synergies to the table?
Looking at the report the prime mover behind the move is a London born and based guy, and I'm going to engage in lazy stereotyping, judging by his surname a Spurs fan.
Yes, that he is offering it now is rather inconsistent with not wanting to even offer a vote on it (apparently the main goal of negotiations ahead of Edinburgh). But two questions would have led to a nightmare campaign. Why not offer a referendum on whatever they cobble together in the event of a 'no' vote? (Answer: because then England, Wales and Northern Ireland would need one.)
And don't forget MaxPB, that without the North Sea oil and Gas rUK's imports will increase dramatically causing a huge outflow of sterling.
This is just one reason I personally do not want a currency union with rUK post-independence as sterling is a flawed currency and in terms of risk means Scots could be endangered by rUK's lack of real productive assets to back up its currency. Furthermore the thought of leveraged buy-outs of lucrative and cheaply priced Scottish businesses and real estate by London speculators does give me the shivers.
ROFL
so when the price of oil has drop 15% in the last 3 months you think that's good news ? It.s excellent news for rUK as a net importer but may give IScotland a few issues.
BTW when exactly did Scots become innumerate ?
So prices fluctuate - so what? The long term trend is that prices are going up and that is what is holding up the UK's ratings - it's called economics not accountancy. Global reserves are falling while North Sea discoveries are increasing - a fact that is proven by the number of announcements West of Shetland and elsewhere with untapped reserves in the West of Scotland considered to be more than the North Sea. The last quarter is an irrelevance - those who buy gilts look forward decades as any economics A-level student could tell ye. Again though, you have ignored the income from corporation tax from the North Sea accounting for a large percentage of UK's total take. Post independence those will go to Scotland. AND, profits will go into Scottish registered banks which will experience healthy asset ratios - the capital flight will head North. And again, importing oil will mean an outflow of sterling placing further pressure on the currency and political pressure on Carney to print yet more pounds - eventually the markets will stop buying them and the bond market will collapse. I hope the Scottish dollar will be established by that point! Never mind, you'll still have some foreign owned football teams to watch while rUK is being turned into an offshore tax haven for foreign investors..
Comments
But try Scapa -you'll thank me.
Though I am "safe" in Cardiff, it has made me contemplate the "what if" we ever get down this insane road as espoused by Plaid here. Warp speed to the poor house for us it would be. I would have to seriously think about packing my bags it would be so bonkers. Fortunately I genuinely believe we are light years away from that but that doesn't allay your fears. Best wishes.
Funnily, that's what I tell her. We will have time to assess how we make the best of it, in the event Yes wins.
Anyone who doesn't join, cheer or support these marches could feel themselves subject to intimidation.
Yes I'm a leftie. And I'm also a Unionist. The Better Together campaign has been an apocalypse of a campaign offering no passion or vision or hope, just a lecture and threats. You don't win an argument like that, especially when you have completely misjudged both the strength of opinion against you and the appeal of the vision and hope offered by the other side.
Yes, independence is high risk. But when the UK is also high risk and offers little hope or prospects, what the hell is there to lose? You might not agree with that diagnosis of the UK and I certainly don't. But enough peopole voting appear to feel that way, and their disenchantment with the current system has been dismissed as something that can be bought off with threats about having to pay to watch Eastenders.
How many times do you say you are going to leave your partner or leave your job before you actually do ? more than once I would say
[whack!]
That I will
Just seen on Master of Malt Scapa do a 16 year....hmmn.
A certifiable loony on the rampage.
As I say there's a perfectly respectable "independence and to hell with the cost" point of view, but I for one would be really worried if I lived up there.
It even makes the scintillating views of the M25 from the North Downs Way seem majestic ...
(*) As designated by me
ft.com:
Second Scots poll gives No campaign lead
ICM survey backs claims that Yes surge has been halted
elswhere:
"Neck and neck" "still too close to call" "everything to play for" etc etc...
The income from oil for the government includes corporation tax and there is also the small matter of the jobs it underwrites. However, the income from oil is set to grow as prices expand and lets face it, the UK is only paying it's interest off (the debt rises exponentially..) - without the oil borrowing will increase and rUK's ratings will nosedive.
However what happens to those corporate profits after tax? They go into the banking system and cover the capital ratios of the banks allowing for huge volumes of leverage and ergo financial speculation. It also allows for the purchase of guilts.
The patients do need to keep up!
It seems to suggest that YES may win on the back of sheer anger and disillusionment about Westminster, rather than any deep seated loathing of the Union itself.
If that is true, and the vote is carried, it will be an absolute tragedy.
It was like drinking whisky from an ashtray full of dog ends.
Revolting. I gather some love it. Bleugh.
Typically the young and the poor are the least likely to vote but I;m sure your passionate argument that a Currency Union with a semi-bankrupt state will motivate them.
Was the response spread of age representative ?
This is just one reason I personally do not want a currency union with rUK post-independence as sterling is a flawed currency and in terms of risk means Scots could be endangered by rUK's lack of real productive assets to back up its currency. Furthermore the thought of leveraged buy-outs of lucrative and cheaply priced Scottish businesses and real estate by London speculators does give me the shivers.
I was really unimpressed for a long time by her Leadership. Not so much anymore.
Not rude, just 100% correct.
I visited the Isle of Arran distillery and got a bottle of their 10 yr old, and another finished in Amarone. That's almost pink...
rUK: too small, too poor, too weak!
The next confirmed Indyref polls
YouGov for the Times/Sun - Wednesday night
Ipsos-Mori phone poll - Wednesday (probably the night)
The classic combination of whisky with food is I reckon is fruitcake (Dundee cake for preference, but most will do) and with a creamy, crumbly but strongish cheese (Wensleydale is superb) all washed down with a single malt whisky of your choice (I am an Islay man for preference, but not dogmatic on the issue). The mix of textures and flavours makes the combination fit for the Gods.
They've got the most stunning range of all things spirits. A supplier took me there back in 2003 and we drank what felt like a gallon of vintage stock. Stuff 100+yrs old and it was super fun. The bill wasn't my concern so that made it even better. I think it was over a grand for the two of us inc lunch!
The one pollster that won't be polling is TNS-BMRB.
I think though, from a frank position, the papers must love such events as this. Don't blame them of course!
These polls, tweets are ruining my nerves. My usual cool exterior close to cracking!
If that's the case now, next Thursday overnight will be truly horrendous for what's left of my nerves!
I've already warned my Wife to expect me to still be up when she awakes for work. I've taken a long weekend just for the referendum.
so when the price of oil has drop 15% in the last 3 months you think that's good news ? It.s excellent news for rUK as a net importer but may give IScotland a few issues.
BTW when exactly did Scots become innumerate ?
The SNP have created a new reality. They have said again and again (i) how rich and successful Scotland is (i.e. we can go alone) and (ii) look at all these benefits you will get when we are independent (i.e. we should go alone). Saying it often and consistently enough has made enough people believe it...
...it is nonsense, of course, none of their sums add up and many of their arguments are ludicrous (my favourite, little remarked upon, is their estimate of just 200m to setup a whole new state! In the real world, 200m will, perhaps, pay for a moderately large IT system).
The UK's breakup will be long and painful. There will be enormous shock & anger in England / the rUK at the outcome.
Some on here used to focus on the Leader ratings...
Cameron = 39% satisfied (Tory polling lot less than that)
Mililband = 29% satisfied
Net sat/dis-sat
Cameron -15%
Miliband - 29%
(Central forecast)
Con vote lead 8.8%
Con seat lead 82 seats
(10000 Monte Carlo simulations)
Chance of Tory vote lead: 100.0%
Chance of a Tory seat lead: 99.7%
Chance of a Hung Parliament: 32.3%
Chance of a Tory majority: 67.2%
Chance of a Labour majority: 0.0%
I'm of the view that going negative could be effective if done properly and utterly self-destructive if done badly. Better Together have managed the latter, but appear to be ramping up the fear again (will we have adverts listing all the businesses who have said they will leave/hike prices on Sunday?).
At the same time, UK party leaders campaigning separately to show they're Better Together, and a Devo Max on a Fag Packet proposal that most MPs haven't even seen as the reason to vote no isn't the way. We need a big pro-union rally with all of them actually together. They all agree on the Union, set party politics aside for a week and appeal to all we have done together and all we could still do. I do fear that the more we shout fear and abuse at them, the more the wavers will waver into Yes. Just to prove the point to us.
'ALEX SALMOND and Jim Sillars yesterday insisted they had set their differences aside'
They'll never be best pals, and Sillars isn't an MSP or holds any official position in Yes (PB Unionists were recently quoting approvingly his anti CU views as signs of 'splits'). All broad coalitions are uncomfortable to a greater or lesser degree, but Yes makes it work towards one end, while BT have one eye on Westminster & England at the same time pretending their less savoury co Unionists don't exist.
Opinium in their Westminster VI polls don't use past vote recall but weight by demographics.
If they do the same here that would put them in the same boat as Ipsos-Mori which have the largest leads for No in the past.
It will be up to their politicians to explain why that money is being diverted from health and welfare.
ie currency , business issues ,immigration etc
I would prefer the Scots to decide the vote based on what they know the rest of the UK is thinking (and it isn't we love you please dont' go like a scene in Gone with the Wind )
Funny how views can stick. I developed a serious dislike of most Arabs [North African mostly] back in the 80s when I had a load of mouthy hot-heads working for me. They were nothing but a pain in the arse.
Byelection swingback: -1.2% nc
Fisher: 2.6% down
2009-2010 repeat: 3.5% down
Prosser: 5.0% nc
L&N: 8.8% up
Only mention it cos Spurs will feature in the 2014/15 version of that table which is a bloody mirabcle... we peaked too soon, like ....?
Anyone know if this Yank firm bidding for Spurs Raiders Inc, is from San Antonio as that would bring some obvious synergies to the table?
Westminster gave the No side nothing to work with. That is the problem. The Devo-max promise should have been on the table months ago. With this and the warnings about the risks of separation we would not be six days away from the break-up of the country. It dod not need to be an option on the ballot paper, but it should have been there from the start as a reason to vote No.
So they aren't cowboys.
http://tinyurl.com/p3he9nf
@OpiniumResearch: Big #Opinium/Observer yes/no Scottish #indyref poll coming out at 8pm on Saturday #indypoll @YesScotland @UK_Together @tobyhelm
Apart from that, good effort
I really should get out more!
"Shadsy is seldom wrong"
When linking to him saying yes was no value at 5/1